Event Details
Date Unknown
Description
The District Court applied the McDonough standard and found Juror 50's testimony credible and his responses not deliberately incorrect.
Participants (1)
| Name | Type | Mentions | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Juror 50 | person | 685 | View Entity |
Source Documents (1)
DOJ-OGR-00021895.jpg
This legal document, page 18 of a court filing dated December 2, 2024, discusses the District Court's denial of a Rule 33 motion for a new trial. The motion was based on an allegedly erroneous answer given by 'Juror 50' during voir dire. The document explains that the court applied the standard from 'McDonough v. Greenwood', finding the juror's testimony credible and his response not deliberately incorrect, and also noting that the defendant, Maxwell, had not challenged other jurors with similar backgrounds.
Related Events
Events with shared participants
The jury selection process where Juror 50 gave answers that corroborated his hearing testimony.
Date unknown
Date referenced regarding Juror 50's testimony/disclosure status
2021-11-04 • N/A
Juror 50 commented on Annie Farmer's Twitter post
2022-01-01 • Twitter
A potential juror (ID 50) answers a questionnaire to determine their suitability to serve on a jury.
Date unknown
A Post-Verdict Hearing where Juror 50 allegedly lied to the Court.
Date unknown • The Court
Voir Dire process where Juror 50 allegedly concealed material information and gave false answers.
Date unknown
Voir dire process where Juror 50 stated he had no doubt about his ability to be fair and impartial.
Date unknown
A hearing where Juror 50 provided testimony.
Date unknown
A close, contested trial involving Ms. Maxwell where the key issue was the credibility of the accusers.
Date unknown
During the jury selection for Ms. Maxwell's trial, Juror 50 failed to disclose his claimed victim status, which is argued to have robbed Ms. Maxwell of a fair trial.
Date unknown
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein event